Now what's even more interesting is that Shia's phone's ringtone is GBU theme (actual Morricone version, not the one on my own old Cheapo phone) it rings twice in the film. So who put this little touch in, like who suggested it? Eli, Douglas, Stone, Shia ? I think it's a neat connection, GBU theme and Eli in same film !!!

Haha:) seriously, what do you find to save in this movie exept for what I highlighted? Terrible acting, characters, editing, cinematography, dialogues, voice over, music...... And stupid story. I recognize I may have missed some nuances due to the French translation/dubbing, but...

Oh the husband was cool (character and acting).

I don't know, but it is fascinating form the first to the last second. Probably great acting, characters, editing, cinematography, dialogues, voice over, music and intriguing story. Well, have to check the voice over ...

The difference is that there's generally some consistency to what we call contrived or implausible. You on the other hand seem to pick nits or get riled up for truly bizarre reasons, with a set of standards understandable only to yourself. More annoying though is your eagerness to play the persecution card every time you're called on it.

Exactly.

Also as a heterosexual, I am in no place to quote any of his previous posts. I'm thinking he typed that bizarre line so I didn't quote his thoughts on Kiss Me Deadly and many other films - reasonably well played on his behalf, I must admit.

Logged

Claudia, we need you to appear in LOST COMMAND. It's gonna revolutionize the war genre. What did you think of the script?

Also as a heterosexual, I am in no place to quote any of his previous posts. I'm thinking he typed that bizarre line so I didn't quote his thoughts on Kiss Me Deadly and many other films - reasonably well played on his behalf, I must admit.

That pretty much sums it up. But the Cult of Welles won't let you say such things and get away with it. They'll be after you for the rest of your life.

Ahh, come on, every film can be criticised by anyone. And is done, especially in the www, and also on this board.

I don't need a cult to enjoy Welles. And The Lady from Shanghai is for me pure fascination when watching it. It surely is also one of the most 100 fascinating (= one of the 100 best) films I have ever seen. It works on a direct emotional level, without one needing any explanation what it all is about or how it was made.

Ahh, come on, every film can be criticised by anyone. And is done, especially in the www, and also on this board.

I don't need a cult to enjoy Welles. And The Lady from Shanghai is for me pure fascination when watching it. It surely is also one of the most 100 fascinating (= one of the 100 best) films I have ever seen. It works on a direct emotional level, without one needing any explanation what it all is about or how it was made.

Still, I'd really like to know what fascinates you in this movie. If I didn't I would probably not bother posting a review here. If it works on a direct emotional level, you probably identify yourself with the main character? Doing so was impossible to me: I could never understand his actions. Is he supposed to be simple minded? He knows there is a trap and goes right into it, doing even things that he doesn't need to. He never anticipates anything. I cannot understand his actions or even what he wants.

There is a Cult of Welles, of course, and if you ask me he deserves it. Someone who has done Citizen Kane at the time he did it, the way he did it and before he was 25 is my hero (even if CK is too cold to be a personal favorite of mine). I don't really really like his other films I saw (Amberson and Touch of Evil) but at least they had this "Mr.-Orson-Welles-aka-the-guy-who-changed-Cinema-for-ever" feeling. Now, with The Lady, like I said: remove the 5 last minutes, the very very few (I mean no more than 3 or 4... I actually can think of only one) cool shots before that, and I sincerely cannot see anything else than real garbage taking all the clichés from Noir and executing them very poorly without really understanding them.

I rented the dvd off Netflix; unfortunately, it is a pan and scan. Considering that the original movie is in 2:35:1, that means that the we are missing we are missing 45% of the width of the picture, so it is terrible, and you can't help but think about it virtually all the time. Especially cuz this is a fighting movie, and there are times when bot fighters are supposed to be in the shot, and they insteda have to show only one, or half of both. On the rare long shots (eg. a shot that shows an entire fighting ring with the crowd), it isn't as bad, cuz you can see the entire ring in middle, it's just the crowd that's cut. But there are very few long shots in this movie, most of it is very gritty in your face stuff, so it is absolutely awful that it is pan and scanned).

I guess the dvd must have been a direct transfer from a pan and scan VHS, eh? wtf happened, they lost the original film? It's very disappointing to have to see it this way. (and especially coming from Columbia, a major studio). I hope I can see it one day in the 2:35:1 version. Anyone know whether the widescreen version is available somehow?

« Last Edit: January 18, 2012, 04:44:32 PM by drinkanddestroy »

Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.

Thanks for the insight. But are you saying there have never been 3rd rail electrocution deaths in the NY subway? And what if you intended to kill yourself, as the Robert Shaw character decided to do? Let's assume that that was always his backup plan. Is there nothing someone so minded could do to ensure the lethality of the experience (shoes with superconductivity built in, say)? I noticed that Shaw braces his opposite foot against a regular rail before extending the other foot to the electrified one; was that to prevent grounding?

No. you said that. Plus, my Daddy didn't lie to me. He wasn't a MSCPO electrician's mate in WWII and Korea for lying.

I just said, it wouldn't happen like that. The current would throw him off. And touching another rail would ensure grounding. Simple standing on the ballast may or may Not work; it may be too dry for good current flow. I've been nailed a on AC, I know people who have. AC makes for this "can't let go" , not DC. There are electrical safety rules about this on AC switchboards and fuseboxes, etc.

Shaw (I don't like him as an actor; he always plays some creep or a**hole) committed suicide on a whim; he wouldn't pound copper rivets into his shoes before hand. Still, it was a good scene, even tho stupid, like Dirty Harry's blowing up the tower at Alcatraz with a shaped charge*...too bad "Myth Busters" is out of business.

Defibrillators use a DC pulse. the patient convulses. Even tho they are Dead. AC is used to Stop hearts. Remember Galvani's frog? It was DC, it's leg jumped, involuntarily, even tho it was Dead.

just like the scene that could have included a helicopter instead of all NYPD being alerted. Or Leone's mock " machine gun" in AFFOD; That's Hollywood.

* shaped charges. like a LAWS rocket, burn, they don't explode like a grenade. It would burn a 3/4" hole into the tower, if it's fuse found enough resistance on the wood to even go off. It may burn a bigger hole going out. Army personnel who have used them told me. Still, a good scene...

I just said, it wouldn't happen like that. The current would throw him off. And touching another rail would ensure grounding. Simple standing on the ballast may or may Not work; it may be too dry for good current flow. I've been nailed a on AC, I know people who have. AC makes for this "can't let go" , not DC. There are electrical safety rules about this on AC switchboards and fuseboxes, etc.

Shaw (I don't like him as an actor; he always plays some creep or a**hole) committed suicide on a whim; he wouldn't pound copper rivets into his shoes before hand. Still, it was a good scene, even tho stupid, like Dirty Harry's blowing up the tower at Alcatraz with a shaped charge*...too bad "Myth Busters" is out of business.

I believe you, I'm just wondering if there was some way for the filmmakers to have made the scene more believable. Is there anything they could have done, or is the very idea of a 3rd Rail Death impossible? They should have gone for a cyanide capsule instead?

Logged

That's what you get, Drink, for being such an annoying Melville fanboy.

No, the fact that the whole film is about a subway hi-jack scheme means the 3rd rail suicide is an appropriate ending. I'm just trying to figure out if the filmmakers could have done anything differently to make things better. Is there a way to stage a 3rd rail death that is both dramatically satisfying AND true to the facts? That's all I want to know.

Logged

That's what you get, Drink, for being such an annoying Melville fanboy.